Loading...
12/06/1983 - Special . " " I . ' " !' ' I' ;"',' < .4. '... . '. . . ~. .., " :' " ; ; , ,-.., , ! r---, OPPICIAL l . ~ . ~ M 1 NUT II S RHSOUnCn DBVBI.OPMUNT COMMI1'Ttm SPECIAL MEETING December 6, 1983 vi ..'1 ,. . \. . , ,. Members prescnt: Elizabeth S. Haeseker. Assistant City Manager - Chairman John Chester, representing the Fire Marshal's Office John Rooks) representing the Public Works Department Keith Crawford, Traffic Engineering Director William E. Tripp, Acting Building Director Cecil Henderson, Utilities Director David P. Healey, Planning Director Ream Wilson, Parks and Recreation Director Also Present: Mr. Ed Mazur, Post Buckley Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. Mr. Charles Brackett, Mason of Florida, Inc. '.~ 'J ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- , '" The meeting was called to order by Elizobeth S. Haeseker, ChairmanJ at 8:38 a.m.~ . in the Operations Center Conference Room. Spring Lake, located at Southeast corner of Keene Road and County Road 34. lMason of Florida, Inc.) FINAL SITE PLAN - APPROVED. .. OJ' SUBDIVISION PLAT - APPROVED. .( , .,' Mr. Mazur gave a brief synopsis of the changes made to the plan. Mr. Mazur stated a second ~ntrance was added on Keene Road, the cut-dc-sac located in the Southwest corner was shortened, and approximately three lots were elimina- ted in that area. The 60 ft4 right-of-way was removed and replaced with a standard roadway. The remainder of the site has the s~e type of lots (4SxlOO); the detail in the lower right-hand corner meets with City code. The configura- tion was changed slightly in the Northern area to ease circulation. ~Ir. Mazur stated the last time this Committee Teviewed the site plan, the ISP area was called Parcel A and originally suggested reserving approximately 20 units for that 'area. The applicant now does not have any intention of building residential in the area. He further stated Mason Homes hos been approached by n local church who is interested in building a 5,000 sq. ft. building in that area. He further stated that although this aTea has not been sold, it is in the process of negotiations. : 0",\'0 ~' : ~ . ~ '.'. '. ~ ~ I " , ":':'00. " .~ I , J\ 1'.:' :', 0 f', . }:;'::.",.. ~~i . ",..; ~,' . . t:lt.>'. . - 1 - ::-:' '...-... , , r-" ~ John Chester - No comments. I. '+ .......,~.~.,..., " ~ ...~'... :.....1 John Rooks - See written comments (Attachment I). Mr. Rooks stated a to-foot easement would be required for the pump station. Mr. Rooks requested that the force main be located in the right-of-way. Mr. Mazur replied that that would be no problem; it will be located t-2 feet inside the right-of-way. Mr. Mazur further stated there is a to-foot area that is going to be dedicated as additional right-of-way to County Road 34. Keith Crawford - No comments. William E. Tripp - No comments. Cecil Henderson - See written comments (Attachment 2). Mr. Henderson commented he did not have any problem wit}l the small lots but does have a real problem with the restrictive rights-of-way and restrictive street widths whic~ he feels will cause a continual problem. I Mr. Crawford questioned if there were any deed restrictions that would prohibit parking other than on the lot itself. Mr. Brackett responded that it would be incorporated into the deed restrictions. ~Ir. Crawford questioned who would enforce the restriction. ~{r. Brackett replied the homeowner's association would enforce the deed restriction. David Healey - suggested sliding the recreation area to the North and flip flop Lots 138 and 139 with the recreation area, eliminate Lot 130, shorten the cul-de- sac so it does not intrude beyond the DER jurisdictional line. He further stated if the cul-de-sac is shortened, Lot 2 maybe salvaged while Lot 1 would be eliminated. Mr. Healey commented that his suggestions~would be passed along at both the Planning and Zoning Board and the City Commission. ~to eliminate Lots I, 2, and 130 Mr. Healey commented the ISP District would require a Land Use Plan Amendment and suggested the applicant file a waiver of right to notice to shorten the process and feat ch i.t- up with the re'st of the proj ect . allow it to Ream Wilson - No comments. .) , ' '1. . Preliminary David Healey moved to recommend approval of the Final Site Plan and/Subdivision Plat for Spring Lake based upon a finding of this Committee that the plan conforms with the design guidelines for site plan review, subject to the following: :' MOTION ", ", A. Changes to be made prior to its submission for consideration at Public Hearing by the City Commission: .:1, ' ,..." B. The addition of the utiljty easement along the East property line as required by the Public Works Department. Th~t the following conditions be attached to the approval of the RPD plan: ',,", ;'," , ...-.., " J. .' \"' ~:~.... .' 1. The dedication of the additional lO-foot of right-of-way for County Road 34. r ~ ,.,' , . ' .L... :. 2. That the ISP area be subject to separate site plan review at such time as it is to be developed. ~:.:.': .' ~~ ' .- l1~;: . \'(ib:~;-i;' :js~~,\-':;,,;),~,,;;:::,,', >",,: . :,;:':);: "', - 2 - ~ .. "'/' < " . ~ +./'. . , ~ .~ I I." ,...t,.. ,'1;". .,:".' '.., .:.',', 'rl,''''''''') ~};~~},;::..:...'r;: ."... ':. '-<?~/ , ~ ~ . .' . . ., +:~;":'; \1;,-':. !.."f.r' ',.' . . /", . ~t.::. " ' .' . ',' '~, >"".,' ,',', ',,' ,'".,':,',\(;: '~"" " , ' ',' ""~,, ,I. ,f' I ,,' ~ " " " . ;;1, ';/',\'\ 'I" .~, ",' ,-... ~ 3. or That there be n private covenant filed with the plat of condominium documcnts and rcmain n condition of site pIon approval that will explicitly preclude parking of any motor vehicle, recrcation vehiclc, or boat on the strect surface. 4. That the typical building layout pIon be clarifiou to indicatc that all of the setback dimcnsions are, in fact, minimum requircd dimcnsions. 5. That a detailed site plan for the recrcation area be approved beforc construction commences. and 6. That a detailed plan for the proposed wall in landscaping along Keene Road and County Road 34 accon~any the final certified pIon, and that said wall not be located closer than five feet to ,the right-of-way. 7. That the initial building permit be obtained within six months from the date of approval of the Final Site Plan and the project be completed within two ycars from the date of the initial building permit. C. As a suggestion of the Committce as opposed to a condition, that the applicant look at the relocation of the recreation area and an adjust- ment of the cul-de-sac andlSoutherly most lots numbered I, 2, and 130. bfil.-al.imi-nat-Q.Gt.. ~elimination of the " ":'" .~~ The motion was seconded by John Rooks. Discussion on the motion. , i " ' Cecil Henderson - Stated he could not in good conscience vote for the project for the reasons mentioned earlier. Ream Wilson - Qhestioned how the developer proposed to solve or handle the garbage. Mr. Mazur replied that there will be a covenant that says no parking on either side of the street. He further stated that the street width is 24 feet and the standard roadways are 26 feet--Ieaving a difference of 2 feet. Keith Crawford - Questioned if this was going to be platted as a condo. Mr. Mazur replied no--single family, fee simple. Mr. Crawford questioned what the homeowner's association owned. Mr. ~fazur responded that the home- owner's association would have ownership 'over the lake, the recreation area. and the maintenance of all of the roadways. Mr. Crawford further stated he thought the enforcement of the no parking on the street would be difficult 'for the homeowner's association to enforce. \ " Mr. Mazur commented that in addition to the other restrictions mentioned earlier, there would be a restriction against enclosing a garage and making the garage into an additional bedroom. for the separate zoning districts Mr. Healey stated the legal description/would have to be prepared prior to ordinance preparation. :"'0" .t. :, " ~.. : ' .'. . ;;: " ;'.<::" ;-.~: . ' Mr. Mazur questioned that the typical building plan layout be clarified. Mr. Healey replied another note specifying that all dimensions are minimum required dimensions would be required on the plan. 'i:' ,', :L:~. ' "~~rl~. . ~ I t~~'.' '. ,'t,"'" ri\ I. t'" : . .. ; ~ ~ ~ . ;.!~: ~ " . ~I;': :,r:,;i. i:, \ ' .. "'I,"" ~~rJ ' ,li': ~ . ", f:.>.. , . ',' f.~":', . :,>. 'l . ;1:", ',1" :.}:~ , rl.' ;;';', ~ t':,':::,; , I,~: '":,' :,'..-.(". t~; .' '/ ~ I;,:),' ~ . f.{:' \ ~ ' 'i ;, ~:j~:\ /' I') r\ Mr. Healey questioned the appli~antts reaction to Part C of the recommondation in the motion. Mr. Mazur agreed to move the recreation area and flip flop the lots. Mr. Mazur/agpeed-te-meet the City half-way by complying with one of the suggestions,' 'suggested the applicant was' meeting The motion carried with one vote in opposition (Cecil Henderson) ,. The meeting adjourned at 9:20 a.m. " ..\'~ J"';., ~~',~.,:, I '. . '.: ~ . t , ,.. ,,' . , " "".,J.j.... )" 'lr~~It;,. '" . ~, , " " .... J " . . , ~.. ' , ' .... ll:;. . ;!\;~.l :':~'H ":" ' : ,:. \; ~~\,j> >.:. , I . .. . I' . r .:, ~ I : .. . J ~;~\;1,>;: "', .. ";J,,:,.ttV"~' ,,' ,".', f: ';" .: ""~::~' ':,e ~ ".'.. ' \. ,. ~'. , I" . :1- .r' . ~ 1iX&~:~:" ,';:; ,'," ,''-,'1:' ".~ :,,;:, /.' ti,-:;/:.,.:.l':...... ..tf,". ; ~',;1 };;.~.'}. \,.... ,:,',::' i......:~:~:.. i.~'s.-~i~,.:~, ,:.. <' . '. . m ";"'.,,,,'r" ".} ~ '., .l~ '.. Ifi:~1\,;1;}:~",';:,<:!,:,:',;r.; , ;1:.. 1 ". ." ".' l . . 1 b ',. .1 ~ .;: .;' '" , , " . . .1;,' ~ ~ . . . " ; , ..' 'f', > 'c '":. ~ ./. '. . ,'. ~ ',' " ,. .<1, .' ,. ' .... '. ',' ',\ 'I :.' . ~.- j 1 ~ ~ . ..j,' . ~ . . , " ;) , t' ::-'. :;, ')-.~ 'I. '\ ',- , , >,..1 , ,\ , , 'I " . . . ~.' . ,.', -."1' " .. ~t "'." .l. , "~I .., , I>~ "1, " . . ',.1" ..... , : '4 "